Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1540233

Re: netlink: GPF in sock_sndtimeo

From Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: netlink: GPF in sock_sndtimeo
Date 2016-12-12 11:10 +0100
Message-ID <sNvIv-30q-49@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References (3 earlier) <sMmxA-8aC-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <sMnjY-8qN-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <sMrdT-2wK-39@gated-at.bofh.it> <sMHiF-3Mf-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <sMKzU-6fj-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 8:40 AM, Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 2016-12-08 22:57, Cong Wang wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 10:02 PM, Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>> > I also tried to extend Cong Wang's idea to attempt to proactively respond to a
>>>> > NETLINK_URELEASE on the audit_sock and reset it, but ran into a locking error
>>>> > stack dump using mutex_lock(&audit_cmd_mutex) in the notifier callback.
>>>> > Eliminating the lock since the sock is dead anways eliminates the error.
>>>> >
>>>> > Is it safe?  I'll resubmit if this looks remotely sane.  Meanwhile I'll try to
>>>> > get the test case to compile.
>>>>
>>>> It doesn't look safe, because 'audit_sock', 'audit_nlk_portid' and 'audit_pid'
>>>> are updated as a whole and race between audit_receive_msg() and
>>>> NETLINK_URELEASE.
>>>
>>> This is what I expected and why I originally added the mutex lock in the
>>> callback...  The dumps I got were bare with no wrapper identifying the
>>> process context or specific error, so I'm at a bit of a loss how to
>>> solve this (without thinking more about it) other than instinctively
>>> removing the mutex.
>>
>> Netlink notifier can safely be converted to blocking one, I will send
>> a patch.
>>
>> But I seriously doubt you really need NETLINK_URELEASE here,
>> it adds nothing but overhead, b/c the netlink notifier is called on
>> every netlink socket in the system, but for net exit path, that is
>> relatively a slow path.
>>
>> Also, kauditd_send_skb() needs audit_cmd_mutex too.
>
> Please let me know what you think about the attached patch?

Applied the patch locally and have not seen the bug since then (~24
hours of testing).

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Re: netlink: GPF in sock_sndtimeo Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com> - 2016-11-29 18:00 +0100
  Re: netlink: GPF in sock_sndtimeo Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com> - 2016-11-30 00:20 +0100
    Re: netlink: GPF in sock_sndtimeo Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com> - 2016-11-30 06:00 +0100
      Re: netlink: GPF in sock_sndtimeo Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com> - 2016-12-09 07:10 +0100
        Re: netlink: GPF in sock_sndtimeo Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com> - 2016-12-09 08:00 +0100
          Re: netlink: GPF in sock_sndtimeo Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com> - 2016-12-09 12:10 +0100
            Re: netlink: GPF in sock_sndtimeo Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com> - 2016-12-10 05:20 +0100
              Re: netlink: GPF in sock_sndtimeo Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com> - 2016-12-10 08:50 +0100
                Re: netlink: GPF in sock_sndtimeo Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com> - 2016-12-12 11:10 +0100
                Re: netlink: GPF in sock_sndtimeo Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com> - 2016-12-13 09:00 +0100
                Re: netlink: GPF in sock_sndtimeo Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com> - 2016-12-13 09:30 +0100
              Re: netlink: GPF in sock_sndtimeo Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com> - 2016-12-12 11:10 +0100
                Re: netlink: GPF in sock_sndtimeo Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com> - 2016-12-13 01:20 +0100
                Re: netlink: GPF in sock_sndtimeo Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com> - 2016-12-13 12:00 +0100
                Re: netlink: GPF in sock_sndtimeo Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com> - 2016-12-14 01:40 +0100
                Re: netlink: GPF in sock_sndtimeo Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com> - 2016-12-14 05:20 +0100
                [RFC PATCH v3] audit: use proper refcount locking on audit_sock Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com> - 2016-12-13 16:10 +0100
                Re: [RFC PATCH v3] audit: use proper refcount locking on audit_sock Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com> - 2016-12-13 22:00 +0100
                Re: [RFC PATCH v3] audit: use proper refcount locking on audit_sock Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com> - 2016-12-14 01:20 +0100
                Re: [RFC PATCH v3] audit: use proper refcount locking on audit_sock Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com> - 2016-12-14 05:10 +0100
                Re: [RFC PATCH v3] audit: use proper refcount locking on audit_sock Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com> - 2016-12-14 07:40 +0100
        Re: netlink: GPF in sock_sndtimeo Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com> - 2016-12-09 11:50 +0100
          Re: netlink: GPF in sock_sndtimeo Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com> - 2016-12-09 12:50 +0100
            Re: netlink: GPF in sock_sndtimeo Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com> - 2016-12-09 13:00 +0100
              Re: netlink: GPF in sock_sndtimeo Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com> - 2016-12-09 13:20 +0100

csiph-web